British lawmakers voted Monday to approve controversial plans to allow the use of animal-human embryos for research.
The proposed laws, the first major review of embryo science in Britain for almost 20 years, have provoked stormy debate -- pitting Prime Minister Gordon Brown and scientists against religious leaders, antiabortion campaigners, and a large number of lawmakers.
Other proposals would simplify approval procedures for so-called ''savior siblings'' and offer easier access to fertility treatment for lesbians.
Two days of House of Commons debate began Monday and on Tuesday will include the first major vote on revising British abortion laws since 1990.
Opposition party chief David Cameron -- and several cabinet ministers -- advocate lowering the 24-week limit for abortions in Britain. Legislators will vote on whether to retain the current limit or lower it to 22, 20, or 16 weeks.
Brown has said he believes scientists seeking to use mixed animal-human embryos for stem cell research into diseases such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's are on a moral mission to improve, and save, millions of lives.
The process involves injecting an empty cow or rabbit egg with human DNA. A burst of electricity is then used to trick the egg into dividing regularly, so that it becomes a very early embryo, from which stem cells can be extracted.
Scientists say the embryos would not be allowed to develop for more than 14 days, and are intended to address the shortage of human embryos available for stem cell research.
''I believe that we owe it to ourselves and future generations to introduce these measures, and in particular to give our unequivocal backing, within the right framework of rules and standards, to stem cell research,'' Brown wrote Sunday in an op-ed piece for The Observer newspaper.
But opponents warn that an easing of laws on creating the embryos could lead to the genetic engineering of human beings.
Legislators voted 336 to 176 against banning research using animal-human embryos and by 286 to 223 against a separate proposal covering a specific type of animal-human embryos.
Human Genetics Alert, a science watchdog opposed to the proposed changes, claims the laws could lead to the creation of genetically modified ''designer babies.''
''Once we start down the road to human genetic modification, it will be very difficult to turn back,'' the group warns in a briefing paper for lawmakers.
Opposition Conservative lawmaker Edward Leigh, who tabled an amendment seeking to ban the practice, said the technique was a step too far for science.
''In many ways we are like children playing with land mines without any concept of the dangers of the technology that we are handling,'' he said in the House of Commons.
Dr. Robin Lovell-Badge, a stem cell biologist at the U.K. National Institute for Medical Research, said greater understanding of genetic diseases at the cellular level could speed the development of treatments.
''We have to be careful not to overhype it, because we can't promise anything will work, but if it does work then there will be a lot more understanding. More understanding is crucial to developing new treatments,'' he said.
Britain's Human Fertilization and Embryology law, which regulates all stem cell and embryology research, was drafted in 1990.
Lawmakers will vote later Monday on whether to fully authorize the screening of embryos for genetic characteristics to create ''savior siblings.'' These are cases where parents seek to have a child with specific non-diseased characteristics to help a diseased older sibling through tissue or organ donation.
The proposed laws are in line with the latest scientific developments and would provide Britain's Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority with clearer guidelines. The decisions are currently vulnerable to challenges in court, Lovell-Badge said.
Proposals to end the requirement for in-vitro fertilization clinics to consider the need for a child to have a father will be debated Tuesday. Advocates say the change is necessary to enable lesbian couples and single women to gain easier access to fertility treatment.
Opponents insist the change fails to acknowledge the role of a father in a child's life. (AP)
These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.
Be the first to comment on this story.
If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above.
All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.
Comments that do not concern specific articles in The Advocate or on Advocate.com will not be posted or published. See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.
Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.
Home | Contact | Current Issue | LGBT Community Partners | Staff
Advertise With Us | Jobs | Help
Subscribe: Print Edition Digital Edition | Subscriber Services: Print Edition Digital Edition
Visit our Websites
Out.com | OutTraveler.com | HIVPlusMag.com | Alyson.com | Gay.com | PlanetOut.com
Privacy Policy | User Agreement | Community Guidelines | Legal Notice
Advocate.com © 2008 PlanetOut Inc. All Rights Reserved.
